“The High Price of Telling the Truth About Islam”

How Making a Documentary Defending the Rights of Muslims
Turned my Worldview Upside Down

By Eric Allen Bell

A strange thing happened to me today when I was driving past the Federal Building in Los Angeles. There were a crowd of people assembled there with signs which said that Israel is an aggressive force in the Middle East and that Iran is being picked on. As I stopped at a red light I heard a man with a mega phone lead the protesters in a chant charging Obama with genocide. I saw many young people and several Muslim women with their heads covered. It was an anti-war demonstration that probably a year ago I would have supported. But although I am not in favor of military action, I know that Iran is not another Iraq, and that in fact there is more going on here than the overly-simplified picture that the protestors were painting, as cars drove by honking in support. As the light turned green another sign caught my eye – a picture of the Twin Towers burning which read “911 Was an Inside Job”. As I looked at a sea of Palestinian flags and college kids banging on drums I felt a certain frustration – frustration based on a series of events that have changed my world view.

In the Summer of 2010, having recently escaped Hollywood, CA to take a much needed break from my profession as a film maker, I was driving in my car listening to a story on NPR. It seems the people in my new home of Murfreesboro, TN were up in arms over the proposed construction of a 53,000 square foot mega mosque, to be built in their small town in the middle of the American Bible Belt.

I listened carefully, to the sound bytes, of those who had shown up to a town hall meeting to voice their opposition and, as someone who was rather new to the South, I was surprised by what I was hearing. “America is a Christian nation and there is only one God and his name is not Allah and his son is Jesus Christ” and “America is a Christian Nation” and “These Muslims do not share my values and I don’t want them in my backyard”. Growing up in Southern California, I had never heard anything like this before in my life. And I started to follow the story with great interest.

On the outer edge of town, off a small country road, there was a large parcel of land, right next door to a Baptist church, with a big sign that read, “Future Home of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro”. Over the past 6 months that sign had been defaced twice. Once it was broken in half and another time the words “Not Welcome” were spray painted over it.

Rutherford County, which includes Murfreesboro, only has a little over 100,000 residents and yet the area boasts nearly 200 Christian churches. Having not been much of a fan of Islam or Christianity or religion in general (and that’s putting it mildly) I saw this as something of a David vs. Goliath story – with fanatical Evangelicals bullying a peaceful Muslim population, which had been in the community for over 30 years without there ever being any trouble. And, after learning that in July there was to be a big parade down Main Street to the town square, protesting the construction of this new mosque, I decided someone really needed to make a documentary about this. And even though I had gone to Murfreesboro to escape the film world for a while, it seemed pretty clear that if I did not document this in a movie, no one else would. I wanted to show the world what I was seeing. So I put together a small film crew and began production on a documentary I would title, “Not Welcome”.

I had never seen more American flags assembled together in one place than I had on that hot July morning as the anti-mosque crowd gathered at the base camp to prepare for the parade. Many of the marchers showed up wearing red, white and blue. I had 4 cameras covering the event with one crew embedded with the Liberal activists who were going to counter-demonstrate and the rest of the cameras with me, embedded with those who were to march against the mosque. I conducted several interviews in the school parking lot where locals and those who had driven for hours gathered, prepared to march against what they perceived to be not only a threat to their way of life, but also something of an insult given the events of September 11, 2001. Two Congressional candidates, both promising to “stop the Islamic training camp” showed up and used this opportunity to campaign, one of whom even gave a speech through a mega phone reminding folks to vote for him if they wanted to stop Sharia Law from coming to Murfreesboro. The pastor of Baptist church gathered everyone together in prayer, and the parade took off down Main Street with signs that read “Google the Koran” and “Stop Homegrown Terrorism” and someone in the crowd handed out hundreds of small Israeli flags as several hundred Southerners marched against the mosque.

About six months later I had accumulated over 300 hours of footage, interviewing the parade organizer, both Congressional candidates, the Mayor, the Imam at the mosque and several of its board members, numerous concerned residents on both sides of the issue, Muslim residents, city council members, a Christian Zionist lobbyist who was organizing the opposition to the mosque – and I had even filmed weeks of court proceedings, as a local group had filed suit against the County to stop them from issuing any construction permits to the Islamic Center. The court proceedings were truly a circus as a country lawyer in loud suit with a bow tie argued that Islam is not a religion and that he was prepared to take this matter to the Supreme Court if necessary. That legal action had failed and failed miserably. And although many of the townspeople did in fact have a number of very valid concerns, I felt that those whom they had chosen to represent them were not their best foot forward. In many ways, for the people of Murfreesboro, TN this turned out to be an international embarrassment – given the level of interest from the press.

Also, someone tried to set fire to some construction equipment at the site of the new mosque and the student activist group, calling themselves “Middle Tennesseans for Religious Freedom” put together a candle light vigil where hundreds of townspeople showed up in support of tolerance. A few young men showed up in a pickup truck and honked their horn repeatedly throughout the vigil. Their clothes seemed to indicate they had spent the work day hanging drywall. And when they put up a huge sign in the back of their truck which read “No Mosque” while misspelling the word mosque, I did not hesitate to film them but to also sort of taunt them, in order to provoke a good response on camera. And I got it. One of them said we should suspend the Constitution and went on to say that “All them Mooslums should be shipped home” even the ones who were born here.

Adding more fuel to that fire was an incident that took place when I attempted to interview Kevin Fisher at a Tea Party event on the town square. It was my opinion that in order to avoid accusations of being bigoted, the money interests (a Christian Zionist organization called Proclaiming Justice to the Nations) chose the only person of color, already involved in this issue, to lead the parade and to be a plaintiff in the lawsuit. Kevin Fisher was an African American college dropout, who worked as a prison guard and became a passionate opponent of the new mosque, after his wife divorced him and became, you guessed it, a Muslim convert. When I approached him on the square with a crew that included 4 cameras, saying only “Hi, Kevin” he dialed his cell phone and called 9-1-1 saying that he was being “racially harassed”. This not only made the headlines of the local paper but the incident, including audio from the 9-1-1 call was played over and over that night on the local evening news. This became something of a running joke, when I was recognized at the grocery store in Murfreesboro for instance, people would often point at me and say, “Hey, stop racially harassing me” and then we would all have a big laugh. And Islamic blogs such as Loonwatch.com were only too happy to run an article about how an opponent of the mosque was “playing the race card” against a filmmaker who was just trying to ask questions.

CNN breezed through town and produced a quick hit piece painting all of the mosque opponents as uneducated rednecks and the Islamic community as everyday people who were being wrongly persecuted. Soledad O’Brien’s producer offered to buy some of my footage from me with the explicit promise that their piece was going to be called “Islam: In America” and would not focus more than a few minutes on Murfreesboro. After an inside tip that this producer was lying to me, I confronted him and got some rather vague answers. So I declined to license him any of my material. And sure enough, the CNN documentary did in fact focus exclusively on Murfreesboro and was called “Unwelcome: The Muslims Next Door”. Somehow Hollywood, with its usual backstabbing tricks, had managed to find me hiding out in Tennessee.

I had accumulated a lot of good quality footage. That, combined with the increasing number of physical threats to me personally while filming in large crowds, and death threats that had arrived via email (causing me to look over my shoulder everywhere I went and making it necessary to spend a small fortune on private security) told me it was time. The writing was on the wall. It was time for me to leave Murfreesboro, hire a professional Editor and get to work on assembling my footage to create a feature length documentary for theatrical distribution.

Before I go any further, I should mention that, while all of this was happening, I had become involved in the story itself. I took sides. I sided with the Islamic community in their legal right to build a house of worship and when I was interviewed by the local papers (it’s not every day that a small town like this has someone shooting a documentary there) when I was asked where I stood on the issue I never hesitated to give my point of view. And after a time my point of view was sought out by larger newspapers and several local and syndicated radio programs – mostly Conservative and mostly taking issue with my stance. And I was also invited to write several pieces for Michael Moore’s blog as well.

Although I had left town to edit, there continued to be letters to the editor on a few of the local papers saying that I should leave TN and go back to where I came from. I could not believe the cartoonish way in which those who opposed the mosque were making their case. I felt like I was on the right side of this thing – absolutely certain. But in fact, I was wrong.

Everything I have told you up until now – this version of my story – is exactly how I was seeing things up until something changed. I went home to Los Angeles, showed my 25 minute short version of the documentary to some distributors and backers, and did the usual dog and pony show that had worked so well to raise funds, for other motion picture projects I had been involved with in the past. And sure enough someone said they would back the completion of the movie. It was decided that the focus would be on “the enemy at home” that being what we were calling “Apocalyptic Christianity” (as there was concern about using the word “Zionism” in “Christian Zionism”). The Murfreesboro issue was to be used as something of a jumping off point to take a look at the expanding influence of the End Times Evangelical lobby in the United States and how they use their influence to manufacture consent for the bombing of oil rich Islamic countries and to influence policy on social issues. The theme would focus on the problems we have in America, with our own religious lunatic fringe, rather than on a peaceful group of non-Christians who just wanted to build a place of worship.

After writing a few articles for Michael Moore, I also wrote for a liberal blog called Common Dreams and I wrote over a hundred articles for the Daily Kos, a liberal blog so popular that they receive over one million visitors a day. I felt I was protecting the underdog, going after the bullies. I really believed that I was on the right side of this thing.

But something kept nagging at me on a gut level. Something about all of this didn’t quite feel right. The Arab Spring, which I supported, started to degenerate into the Islamist Winter, and I grew more and more concerned. I flew back to Nashville to shoot a conference on whether or not Islam was conducive with Democratic Values and on the way to my hotel room I learned that my cab driver was from Egypt. I asked him how he felt about the fall of Mubarak, a dictator worth over $70 billion dollars while so much of his country was living in poverty and he told me he was concerned. Concerned? Wasn’t this good news? The cab driver was a Coptic Christian and he told me that he feared for his family back home. “If the Muslims take control, and they will, it will be very dangerous for my parents and my sisters. I’m scared for them right now”. After that conversation, I started to pay more attention to the news coming from the Islamic world in the Middle East.

Over the coming months I watched as the Muslim Brotherhood gained political power in Egypt. I saw that cab driver’s worst fears come true as Coptic Christians were attacked by Islamic mobs. I saw Tunisia institute Sharia, the brutal Islamic Law. After Libya fell, the Transitional Council also instituted Islamic Law. The nuclear armed Islamic government of Pakistan arrested and punished those who cooperated with the United States in killing Osama Bin Laden. A woman under the Islamic government of Afghanistan faced execution for the crime of being raped. Similar news stories emerged from Iran. A man who typed “there is no god” as his Facebook status in Indonesia, the largest Islamic country in the world, was arrested for blasphemy. Several Muslim men in England were arrested for handing out leaflets to Londoners demanding that homosexuals be executed by hanging for violating Islamic Law with their lifestyle.

And it struck me. Even though these angry townspeople in Mufreesboro, TN had not articulated their concerns very well, they were only half wrong. I remember meeting Frank Gaffney and interviewing him in front of the courthouse and asking him if he really thought that the peaceful Muslims here actually presented a real threat to America and he said no. That caught me off guard so I asked if he really thought it was a credible threat that a community that makes up about one percent of the United States population was just going to suddenly rise up one day and try to take over the country and force Sharia Law onto all of us. Again he said no. Then he told me I was asking the wrong questions. He suggested that I was only looking for answers that would support the conclusions I had already arrived at. He said he had, after much research, arrived at a different set of conclusions and he challenged me to look a little deeper. He gave me a report to look at and many, many months later I did look at his report.

It was at this time that I went to my backers and told them that we were not making an honest documentary. I felt that everything I had put into the 25 minute short version (the one I used to raise the completion funds) was true, but only half true. It was critical that we also show the very real threats that exist within Islam. We needed to show that what is happening to these small communities of peaceful Muslims in America were the exception to the rule. I wanted to show what happens to countries when they gain a Muslim majority, how women are treated, that homosexuals were executed, that free speech did not exist, that the forced Islamic Law was not consistent with Democratic Values – anything and everything I could think of that ought to strike a chord with the Liberal mindset. And the response I received was, “Eric you are starting to sound like an Islamophobe. We don’t want to make a movie that promotes fear. Let’s just stick with the existing plan, okay?”

I fought and I fought. I showed them a book called “The Truth About Mohammed” but was struck down since the author was a man named Robert Spencer and my backers pointed out that the Southern Poverty Law Center named his “Jihad Watch” site as part of a hate group. I asked them to watch a documentary called “Islam: What the West Needs to Know” and pointed out that I had researched independently and verified the truth of what was being presented there, but they would not even watch this documentary as they were sure in advance that it was “hate speech” and “propaganda designed to spread fear”. It probably goes without saying that by now I was very frustrated. I showed my new backers several verses from the Koran that call for the killing of infidels and was told that these verses were probably being taken out of context. I showed them a video clip from MEMRI TV of a young Egyptian child reciting a Hadith that calls for the killing of Jews and was told that “you can’t trust MEMRI because they have an agenda”.

I mentioned the popular Islamophobia watchdog site “Loonwatch” and how I had noticed a pattern of deflecting all criticisms of radical and violent Islam by calling anyone who publicly raises these concerns a “Loon” and how I felt this was an intentional effort to provide a smoke screen for the terrorists. I also noted that everything Loonwatch said was in lockstep with the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and how CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation – the largest Islamic charity at one time, which was found to be funneling monies to Islamic terrorist organizations. I also noted that CAIR had ties to both Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood and that Al Qeada had come out of the Muslim Brotherhood. I expressed my concerns that the Egyptian Imam of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro might have ties to the MB, something I had failed to properly investigate. But since CAIR had the support of Glenn Greenwald and Amy Goodman’s show, Democracy Now, I was told that I had my facts all wrong. It was also pointed out to me that if CAIR was allegedly some kind of terrorist front then why do they still have a special tax status and why are they still around? When I said I do not know but it was possible that the government might prefer to watch them out in the open rather than risk them going underground I was told that my judgment was sounding less and less clear and that maybe I needed to take a step back from the project for a while.

As a last attempt I showed them footage of the Imam in Murfreesboro condoning stoning, admitting that Mohammed had stoned someone to death, saying that women cannot be trusted with money because they are irrational. Then I pointed out that a board member of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro was investigated after pictures from his MySpace page had surfaced indicating his strong sympathies for Hamas. I was reminded that Hamas was also a political party which was voted in Democratically and that I needed to make a choice – either stick with the original blueprint or else give the money back and go find myself another backer. So I did. I walked. If I can’t make an honest documentary then I’m in the wrong business. I didn’t want to add to more of the noise that’s out there – I wanted to make something that told the truth, even if that truth is hard to swallow.

It’s funny because I run a website called Global One TV, which has had about 23 million visitors so far, and the theme of this blog is that “Inward Revolution Creates Outward Revolution”. And here I was, having to take my own medicine. My own inward revolution – the questioning of one’s conclusions in search of a deeper truth – had lead me to a very strange place. I thought of the famous Nietzsche quote that says “When you look into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you”. And with nothing left to lose, I used my position at Daily Kos to go about telling the truth.

In January of 2012 I wrote 3 consecutive articles for the Daily Kos. The first was entitled “Loonwatch.com and Radical Islam”. Here I pointed out the how Loonwatch only deflects criticism of radical Islam. I was also critical of Islamic theology while noting over and over that most Muslims were peaceful. The comments section of Daily Kos made me feel like I was attending my own funeral. It was like a public stoning. There wasn’t much in the way of responding to any of the points laid out in my article but hundreds of comments accusing me of being “right wing” a “bigot” and an “lslamophobe”. This was disappointing.

The next day I received an email from Loonwatch.com with an article showing my name and a photograph of my face, going out to much of the Islamic world, calling me the “Loon at Large”. This article was picked up by IslamophobiaToday.com and TheAmericanMuslim.org – later being repurposed by numerous Islamic blogs around the world, including in places where we all know what happens to anyone who is perceived to be the enemy of Allah or who dares to “insult” Islam.

My next article sought to further substantiate my point with regard to these wolves in sheep’s clothing calling themselves “Islamophobia Watchdog sites” and their first line of defense, that being a blogosphere of liberal lemming infidels who are pre-programmed to blurt out the word “Islamophobe” on cue. That article was called “How and Why Loonwatch is a Terrorist Spin Control Network”. And as you might have guessed, this piece was met with the same mob mentality of those who, rather than read the article and criticize it on its merits, instead shot the messenger with charges of “Islamophobia”. There were also 2 Daily Kos articles written in response attacking me personally, another Loonwatch article where someone suggested I must be from TN and have no education, etc. And once again, my name was put out on the street through a network of Islamic Blogs, including the landing page for CAIR, using a form of Islamic double speak which translated to any serious Jihadist means “enemy of Allah” and “insulting Islam”.

Given the incredible density of the popular Liberal mind, how the readers of my articles were unable to see how their beliefs of Islam were in direct conflict with human rights, gay rights, women’s rights and basic Democratic Values, I wrote a final piece called, “Are You In Favor of Human Rights?” and that one of course got me banned from Daily Kos. It should be noted that in one of the Loonwatch.com articles the author, a person simply calling himself “Danios” demanded that DKOS silence me and provided a link for its readers to email the editors of the Daily Kos, demanding that this “Islamophobe” be censored. And it worked – once again proving the oil and water relationship between Islam and tolerance for free speech.

Things got even stranger from there. Robert Spencer himself wrote me an email and we had a rather interesting dialogue. It became apparent almost immediately that there was nothing about this man that was even remotely hateful. So when Robert Spencer asked if I minded if he reprint my email in response to his on Jihad Watch, I said “sure, why not?” Once that surfaced, the friend count on my Facebook fan page dropped suddenly. Friends and acquaintances told me I had become a hatemonger, a fear monger and an Islamophobe. I pointed out that an Islamophobe is someone with an irrational fear of Islam but there was no reasoning with anyone so deeply indoctrinated into the tyranny of political correctness.

And almost right on cue the news story broke about the NYPD using as a training video a documentary narrated by a devout Muslim who opposes terrorism and jihad, someone who has advised law enforcement and served in the military and as a physician to highly placed members of the United States government. That documentary was called “The Third Jihad” and the story surfaced that CAIR was calling this film “Islamophobic” and demanding that the NYPD pull it right away, which of course they did. CAIR demanded the removal of the head of the NYPD and the liberal blogosphere sang backup – most notably with articles on Huffington Post calling “The Third Jihad” propaganda, hate speech and of course more “Islamophobia”. When I posted a link to this documentary on my Facebook page I was met with more charges of being an Islamophobe by people who had only recently told me how much they had been inspired and influenced by my writings.

After Jamie Glasov of FrontPage Mag – part of the David Horowitz Freedom Center – reached out to me to ask me to be on his radio show (which I agreed to) I surfed the web a bit trying to get a better sense of who exactly David Hororwitz was. It became clear almost immediately that we do not share the same political views, but one thing Horowitz did say that came through with stunning clarity was an assertion that there was an unholy alliance between the Left and Islam, with radical Islam using the Liberal media to create a smoke screen for it – a place where radical can appear moderate and receive Liberal support. He also went on to say that in many Universities across America that students were being radicalized, indoctrinated into the far Left. And I remembered something. Nearly all of the organizers for the college aged activist group who demonstrated in favor of the new mosque in Murfreesboro were either Socialists or Communists. These were kids and they all seemed to share one Professor in particular who was something of a mentor to them, a Socialist who always seemed to be hanging around their college parties, infiltrating into their social scene, taking the smarter and more articulate ones under his wing as their campus group called simply “Solidarity” grew in numbers – in fact recruiting quite a few students while organizing in favor of the mosque. Yikes.

So here we are today, as news that Kuwait goes Islamist and the NYPD answers to CAIR, an arm of a terrorist organization, out of concern for political correctness. Have I become a Conservative out of all of this? Not really. I still oppose the invasion of Iraq. I still feel that all wars should be avoided unless absolutely necessary. I still think that George W. Bush was one of the worst things to happen to America in my lifetime. I still support marriage equality. But I’m also still pro-life. Do you see a trend here? I support human rights and oppose anything which I perceive to be in violation of human rights.

Where do I stand on Islam? Let’s look at its founder – a man who raped a 9 year old girl, a slave owner, a leader who ordered people to be tortured, for adulterers to be stoned, for countless nonbelievers to be beheaded, a killer, a warmonger who spread his “religion of peace” by the sword, a man who suffered from hallucinations of voices telling him to do violent things, a tyrant, a homicidal maniac perhaps the equivalent of 100,000 Osama Bin Ladens. And this sadistic lunatic is considered to be the “ideal man” in Islam. What more needs to be said about Islam than that?

So in this climate where innocent people are killed when Korans are burned, when there are riots and bomb threats and killings over cartoons that offend Muslims, when a novelist such as Salman Rushdie is advised by Indian intelligence authorities that it is unsafe for him to enter the country to attend the world’s largest literary festival, when Muslims outside the festival threaten violence such that the festival organizers decide to cancel even patching in a video of Rushdie for the conference, in a world where a man, Theo Van Gough, was shot a couple dozen times in broad daylight, then stabbed, then had a sword rammed into his heart on the sidewalk of a European street simply for making a 10 minute film about the mistreatment of Muslim women – in such a world that is constantly terrorized by Islamic militants whose insanity is co-opted by an army of Liberal bloggers who make excuses for them – who tell us that 911 was probably our fault – what will become of my documentary when I finish it?

How will “Not Welcome” be received? Will movie theaters refuse to show it, just like those many bookstores who removed the Danish cartoons from their shelves? Will film festivals be afraid to screen it? Will my life be in danger? Will some lunatic Islamic cleric issue a Fatwa ordering my death? Will CAIR gain even more political influence and work within the system to get it banned as “hate speech”? Will critics fear for their lives and thus refuse to review it?

Is the Liberal view that Stealth Jihad is just some whacky conspiracy theory really true? Who will win – free speech of the savagery of a growing mob hell bent on Jihad? I can only tell you this. I will not back down. I will not be bullied, threatened, coerced or terrorized by the “religion of peace”.

We each have a responsibility to the other people on this planet, and especially to those whom we will leave this planet to after we are gone. And this sometimes means taking an unpopular stand in order to protect the rights of innocent people. Loonwatch, CAIR and the other numerous terrorist spin control networks – you’ve not seen the end of me. Not by a long shot. As the saying goes, “You have a right to swing your fists, but that right ends when your fist connects with my nose”.

And by the way, I still believe that unless they break the law, the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro has a legal right to build their house of worship. We don’t have to like it, but then again the First Amendment was designed not to protect popular ideas – as they don’t need protecting – but to protect unpopular ideas as well. This is something you won’t find in any Islamic country and it is also something worth protecting – even when the so-called “religion of peace” tries to shut you down.

Peace,

Eric Allen Bell

READ MORE: http://frontpagemag.com/2012/02/07/the-high-price-of-telling-the-tr…

The Mainstream Media Buries Every Negative Story about Barack Hussein Obama

They’ll bury it and they’ll keep it buried, even when they have all of the proof on video. Under the US Constitution, our free press has the right (and, arguably, the duty) to expose public as well as private wrongdoing. Instead, our mainstream media organizations have become consolidated into a small, closed, wealthy clique that opposes and flouts the beliefs and values of most of its audience. They support and protect hard-left/pro-jihadi/radical-environmental (“red-green-green”) politicians and causes – especially Obama and his policies – while trying its hardest to clear the GOP field of any conservative strong enough to unseat him.

What story is being buried? It’s Barack and Michelle Obama’s longtime association and close friendship with former PLO operative and rabid anti-Semite, Rashid Khalidi.

American Thinker: A GOP Candidate’s Bitter Ex-Wife Receives More Coverage Than a Video of Obama Dining with Terrorist-Supporters

(h/t: Diane)

By Lauri B. Regan
[...]
However, of greater importance in my view is the silence, save for a few journalists and pundits on the right, regarding exposing a videotape recorded in 2003 of Barack Obama at the farewell dinner for terrorist-supporting Palestinian Rashid Khalidi. News of the videotape’s existence came to light while Obama was a candidate, and the free pass given to him by the mainstream media was only just beginning to come to light when the enamored Chris Matthews’ shared news of the tingle up his leg.
[...]
But there is a videotape sitting in the vaults of the Los Angeles Times, and every American should be screaming from the rooftops for its release.  In light of the Arab Spring, Obama’s endless attempts to bully Israel into succumbing to all sorts of unprecedented and unsafe demands in the hopes that he would go down in history as the POTUS who made peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, and the administration’s ineptness in addressing Iran’s nuclear program and military threats, exposing this videotape is of utmost importance.

In April 2010, Roger L. Simon published an article on PajamasMedia entitled, “Why is the L.A. Times Burying the Obama/Khalidi Tape?”  Of further consequence is why the media — and Americans — are not demanding that the L.A. Times immediately release the tape.  Simon wrote:

The Khalidi tape could be of tremendous significance in revealing the provenance of Obama’s views on the Middle East and the degree to which the public was misled on those views during the presidential campaign[.] …

So what are we to think? We have an administration that not only ascribes most of the Middle East blame to Israel, but also has banned “Islamism” and all related words, even “Islam” and “jihad” from our national security documents. They’re completely gone. Indeed, even the Fort Hood massacre, so clearly inspired by Islamic extremism, has now been shifted into the comfortable category of the lone, angry killer. Rashid Khalidi should be happy. And, in fact, he is.

Sometimes I want to yell and scream. What is wrong with the Los Angeles Times? Are they a news organization or the propaganda wing of some leftover unit of the IWW? No wonder subscribers are deserting them in droves.

While I am sure that Simon’s questions were rhetorical, I will answer the obvious.  Of course the paper is a propaganda tool.  Were it not for the internet and cable television, true news organizations would no longer exist.  It was recently reported that Jerusalem Post editor Steve Linde quoted Bibi Netanyahu calling The New York Times and Haaretz Israel’s two main enemies because “they set the agenda for an anti-Israel campaign all over the world.”  Netanyahu denies making this exact statement, but there is no question that both papers’ reporting reflects a bias that can be characterized only as anti-Israel propaganda.  Taken a step further, there is no question that the mainstream media as a whole has become completely entrenched in propaganda, bias, anti-Israel and anti-American sentiment, and indoctrination based on liberal, progressive values that are completely out of the “mainstream.”

The public will never understand that the Islamists taking over the Mideast are not moderate, will not promote democracy, are not friends of the United States, and wish the ultimate destruction of the West if the public reads and relies upon only The New York Times, L.A. Times, MSNBC, or similar tools of the left for its “news” and information.  Americans will not understand the implications of four more years of a pro-Islamist president if they do not understand what Islamism is all about.  And they will not know who is sitting in the White House making policy decisions based on personal biases if the media continues to promote Obama’s agenda rather than investigate and report.

So why is the videotape of such paramount importance?  Simon quotes from an article published in the L.A.Times discussing the tape and its contents:

[A] young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, “then you will never see a day of peace.”

One speaker likened “Zionist settlers on the West Bank” to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been “blinded by ideology.”

Furthermore, rumors abound regarding additional messages that may or may not have been openly shared at the dinner in Obama’s presence.  Ted Belman reported at Israpundit that he has a reliable source that “the audio tape clearly picks up the toast ‘death to Israel’.”  Did Obama drink to the death of an American ally that he has been actively intimidating, browbeating, and dissing since he phoned Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on his first day in office?  Does Obama liken Israelis living in the West Bank to Osama bin Laden, whose death he claims as his greatest foreign policy accomplishment?

Simon concluded his article with a request that readers send in suggestions on how to make the contents of the tape public.  Apparently Donald Trump missed this request when he wasted the media’s energy pushing for the release of Obama’s birth certificate — something with which Obama is still having fun as he mocked the birthers at the Golden Globe awards last week.

But I highly doubt that the POTUS, who had his worldview formed while sitting in the pews of Israel-bashing Jeremiah Wright and at the dinner table of anti-Semite Khalidi, will be mocking people who care enough to properly vet his credentials by urging the release of the tape.  And I venture a guess that if the videotape is released, Barack Obama will be packing his bags at the end of this year.  But that is a big “if” because until the media stops obsessing over the infidelities of the GOP candidates and starts doing its job, Barack Obama’s chances of a second term continue to scare the living daylights out of those who understand its implications.

Read it all here.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 15, 2011

Serial litigant and Stormfront member Richard Warman launched a blizzard of lawsuits today, against The National Post and the backbone of the northern blogosphere – Ezra Levant, Kate McMillan, Kathy Shaidle and Free Dominion. He’d laid low for a few weeks, contenting himself with empty threats against McGill students, but he has now made his move. Ezra Levant lays out the legal challenge very clearly, Glenn Reynolds offers some advice, and Jay Currie adds an important point:

“Warman is betting all the marbles here. His credibility and the credibility of the CHRC are now in play. Warman was the CHRC’s creature and, I suspect the evidence will show, the CHRC became his creature as he casually crossed the line between investigator and complainant.”

Precisely. It’s not possible to take a stand against the Canadian Human Rights Commission without also talking a stand against Richard Warman. He has been the plaintiff on half the Section 13 cases in its entire history and on all the Section 13 cases since 2002. There are 30 million Canadians yet only one of them uses this law, over and over and over again, which tells you how otherwise irrelevant it is to keeping the Queen’s peace. Section 13 is, in effect, Warman’s Law and the CHRC is Warman’s personal inquisition and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is Warman’s very own kangaroo court. Whether or not the motivations were pure and pristine when this racket got started, at some point his pals at the CHRC and the “judges” of the CHRT should have realized that the Warmanization of Section 13 doesn’t pass the smell test: Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done, and when you see what’s done at the CHRC you understand it’s a cosy and self-perpetuating romance between a corrupt bureaucracy and its favoured son.

So taking on the CHRC means taking on Richard Warman. I believe my colleague Charlie Gillis will have a piece on Warman in this week’s Maclean’s, on sale tomorrow, so the spotlight isn’t going to be dimming anytime soon. In the meantime, I hope SteynOnline readers will support Ezra, Kate, Kathy and Mark and Connie at Free Dominion. They are private citizens like Richard Warman. Unlike him, they have not been enriched by tax-free awards of significant five-figure sums for entirely mythical “pain and suffering”. So please go on over to the various websites and make a donation, as my pal Michelle Malkin did earlier today. In Kathy’s case, you might also consider buying a copy of her book Acoustic Ladyland: it’s in a good cause, but you’ll get the better end of the bargain because it’s a great read.

- Mark Steyn

Ezra Levant with Marc Lemire: freedom of speech

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 15, 2011

Marc Lemire, the target of Canada’s speech mandarins for 8 years, joins Ezra Levent to discuss, amongst other things, the activities of federal employee Richard Warman.

Then Ezra is joined by Chris Schafer of the Canadian Constitution Foundation.

Much as I want to see Section 13 and the CHRC go down in flames, I strongly advise against strengthening any “hate propaganda” or “hate speech” provisions in the criminal code. That could result in prison sentences, rather than merely civil fines and sanctions, imposed on counterjihad activists and anyone else who violates the standards of political correctness and multiculturalism.

Also see:

• Freedomsite
• @marc_lemire on Twitter
• Canadian Constitution Foundation

The next video shows that the efforts to censor any honest discussion of immigration, multiculturalism, and the threat of Islam are not paying off. Note the silly reference to Muslims as an “ethnic group.”

Canadians take a dim view of islam: poll

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 15, 2011

G** dammit Babs Hall! The peasants are expressing their opinion, AND IT’S THE WRONG ONE! Get in there and imprison them until they hold correct views.

Why We Blog – And How You Can Help

This is one reason why we cover so much Canadian material on the US-based 1389 Blog. One of the missions of our blog, from the get-go, was to fight for free speech for the Counterjihad. Any Canadian counterjihadists who want to make themselves heard should feel free to contact us. All we need is your knowledge and expertise. You need not use your real name!

“Feminism” is a complete fraud. It was never about women. It was always about promoting the leftist agenda at any cost, which includes selling out all the women of Islam.

Oh, and by the way, blog admin 1389 is a happily married WOMAN.

From YouTube:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 9, 2011

Barbara Kay and Charles Adler discuss how feminists’ fealty to multiculturalism has resulted in the selling out of their muslim sistas to the islamic body bag.

Occupy America: Leftists and Islamists United

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by Acts17Apologetics on Nov 20, 2011

http://www.answeringmuslims.com/
Muslims have joined forces with the “Occupiers” to redistribute wealth.

In the article BDS Is Fascism, Gramfan reminded us that proponents of the socialist agenda work hand in glove with those of the Green + Green agendas, forming a Red + Green + Green axis.

In a nutshell, those are our enemies, and this is how they have been operating:

Daniel Greenfield: The Islamist-Environmentalist Alliance

Saudi Arabia has no better friend than the Sierra Club, and the Emirates have no better salesmen than the environmentalists who keep the country hooked on conflict oil. The administration’s sabotage of the Keystone XL project through delays aimed at killing the pipeline is a cynical act of cowardice, and it’s a shot in the arm to the very regimes that it claims to oppose.

The Islamist Spring has mainly hit Arab governments without a huge oil industry, leaving them dependent on patronage, whether from the United States in the case of Egypt, or Iran in the case of Syria. The economic downturn tightened belts and drove mobs into the streets where Islamists and socialists funneled them into anti-government rallies for their own benefit.

Qatar has been smugly stirring up trouble for the rest of the region through Al-Jazeera and laughing at its enemies from behind a shield of oil barrels and Western public relations firms. Libya, the one oil power to fall to the Islamists, would have still been ruled by its cross-dressing madman if NATO aircraft and special forces had not come to the rescue of the Al-Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.

Saudi Arabia has an even bigger stack of oil barrels, and on top of that black pyramid is a degenerate royal family wearing crowns of terrorism and tyranny. Iran has its own pyramid with hanging women dangling off it and the corpses of murdered student protesters floating in the crude. And if the environmentalists really cared about any of that, at least to the extent of wanting to end the wars, then they would be laying a pipeline that would funnel money out of the House of Saud​and the Mullahs back to the United States of America.

Instead billions have been poured into the People’s Republic of China, which lends us the money to pay for the solar and wind power components that we buy from them, and after the handful of watts from green power have been exhausted to spread joy and peace across parts of Vermont and Oregon, the country goes back with hat in hand to the grinning petroleum plutocracies.

No activist group in America has promoted the growth of tyranny around the world the way that the environmentalist movement has. Every time drilling equipment stands idle because it might endanger the home of the spotted purple mock warbler or the congealed nanny state lizard, the cash registers and card readers in the malls of Dubai ring in another payday.
[...]
The tyrants would still be around, but with one hand out for money they wouldn’t be all that much of a threat. It’s no coincidence that the craziest and most vicious tyrants in the Middle East are found squatting on the dirty thrones of oil regimes. Compare Saddam, the Ayatollahs, Gaddafi and the House of Saud to Mubarak or the Jordanian monarchy. Even Assad’s violent tantrums are brought to you by the oil wells of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Environmentalists agree with most of this, knowingly nod their heads and go back to singing the praises of green jobs. Their solution is to cut the flow of money by forcing Americans to cut back and investing in high cost and low efficiency alternative energy programs. Even if their approach were moral and legal, which it is not, it would still be a hopeless failure. Even expensive oil will beat even more expensive green power, and fighting political tyranny abroad by implementing it at home is no solution.

Every time environmentalists kill a project in America, they revive it overseas with less oversight, more pollution and without the human rights. The death of Keystone XL means more pollution in China and war in the Middle East. Crusading environmentalists helped kill America’s industries and kept the regime in Beijing alive. The tanks that rolled over the democracy protesters in Tiananmen Square were as green as their environmentalist backers. Both of them painted in the resplendent color of American money.

Islam’s second act was funded by the same policies that gave the People’s Republic an opportunity to transform its population into our non-EPA, non-union and no minimum wage workforce. And the petrodollars still keep pumping out of the United States and into the regimes funding the growing Islamic sphere of influence. A sphere that is moving to enclose us.

The ANWAR drilling that never happened was money that went into arming and training a new generation of Al-Qaeda recruits, into firing Hamas rockets at Israeli schools and filling the pockets of the Revolutionary Guards​ commanders in Iran. Every time another resource development project dies, another Mullah gets his suicide squad wings.
[...]
Read it all.

Ironically, America’s homegrown socialists – whether in the Obama Administration and the Democrat party, in the #Occupy movement, in academia, in the mainstream media, and in various leftist lobbying groups and “think tanks” – are far to the left of their counterparts in Communist China. I am not claiming that mainland China is no longer communist, only that, in many important respects, we have become more communist while they have become less so.

Lech Walesa rejects OWS

Some of the #Occupy movement signs and slogans seem to resonate with many onlookers. Maybe it’s because they’ve stolen a few talking points (but very little else) from the Tea Party. Maybe it’s because the sympathetic mainstream media carefully edits out what they don’t want you to see.

Let’s take a closer look.

Is this you?

Are you frustrated and angry about unemployment, inflation, the decreasing economic opportunities, the burden of debt, and the declining standard of living in North America, much of Europe, and elsewhere? Are you worried about the sovereign debt problems that bedevil the international financial system?

So am I.

Do you empathize with those struggling to make ends meet in low-paid, part-time jobs? Do you consider bailouts to be unconstitutional, politically and economically unwise, and morally wrong? Do you believe that the Federal Reserve system puts too much power into the hands of too few people who are not accountable to the voters and taxpayers?

So do I.

The Occupy movement blames our predicament on “billionaires”, “rich corporations”, and “Wall Street bankers”. They offer no basis for their accusations, but merely pander to the temptations of envy, sloth, and greed to which all of us are prone.

I agree with Herman Cain in placing most of the blame on Barack Obama and his failed policies. I also blame other public officials in the US and elsewhere whose policies brought about our financial downfall.

Whose side are they on?

Let’s see…the Occubaggers have got the commies, the socialists, the anarchists, the American Nazi Party, the George Soros front groups including the Open Society Institute, the Tides Foundation, and MoveOn.org, along with Code Pink and Michael Moore, the Muslim Brotherhood and its front group CAIR (more about CAIR and its connections here and here), the SEIU, the AFL-CIO, the leftist establishment media including the New York Times and the Washington Post, Frances Fox Piven, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Ayatollah Khamenei, Hugo Chavez, David Duke, and, of course, that architect of failure and scapegoater-in-chief, Barack Hussein Obama himself.

Along for the ride are the aging drugged-out hippies reliving Woodstock, the young drugged-out prep school and college kids looking for a place to fornicate al fresco, the paid shills, the student loan debtors with useless degrees, the trust-fund babies, the anti-Semites, the LGBT nudists, the race-card players, the outdoor urinators and defecators, the pro-abort feminazis, the tree-huggers, the vegans, and the mentally ill. (Many of these categories overlap.) Rounding out the rogue’s gallery are various drug dealers, crackheads, junkies, thieves, rapists, street bums and other lumpenproletariat, and felons hiding out from the law.

None of them speak for me.

Nor do they speak for Lech Walesa.

Former Polish President Won’t Attend #OccupyWallStreet After Citizen Journalists Expose Its Radical Roots

Lech Walesa, former president of Poland, champion in the fight against communism, and winner of the Liberty Medal and Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1989, has decided to not make a trip to New York in support of the Occupy Wall Street protests.

Last week the AP reported that Walesa was backing the Occupy “movement” and considered traveling to New York in support of the growing nationwide mob activity that currently plagues the United States. However, when former Illinois gubernatorial candidate Adam Andrzejewski, (For the Good of Illinois) found out about this, he quickly reached out to his contacts in Poland to alert the former president to the truth behind this radical movement.

“We made the point that the political themes of Occupy Wall Street may have started out with some of the principles that we share, but OWS themes were rapidly being morphed into anti-freedom and anti-liberty messages. At the core is the want for a big, powerful central government to dominate the lives of individual citizens.” -Andrzejewski

In his write-up last night at BigGovernment.com, Andrzejewski stated that with the help of BigGoverment and other sources, he was able to convey an accurate picture of the Occupy movement, particularly that it is “…organized by anarchists, Code Pink, the American Communist movement, jihadists, anti-Israel, socialist, and anti- free enterprise interests.” After reviewing this information about the true nature of the demonstrations, Walesa and his team withdrew their support and will not be attending any Occupy protests.

We were overjoyed to learn that recent Rebel Pundit investigative reports and footage were able to play an an important role in Walesa’s decision. According to Andrzejewski:

“They appreciated the inside info- they weren’t getting that in Poland from the European media.”

Much more here.

Also see:

• Former Soviet Citizen Confronts Citizens At #OccupyWallStreet
• ‘Dirty Jobs’ Host Mike Rowe Not Impressed By Obama’s Class Warfare
• Occupy Wall Street Is No Friend to Small Business
• Tea Partier Forced To Break Down Flag Pole, Occupy Protesters Left Alone
• New Yorkers Fed Up With Defecating #OccupyWallStreet Protesters
• What Jesus Would Not Do

So…does the #Occupy movement speak for you? Unless you truly are a leftist, with all that this implies, the answer is no.

Scapegoating the Jews

Over a week ago, we warned about this: ‘Occupy Wall Street’ Protestors Blame ‘Jewish Bankers, Billionaires’. Neither Obama nor the union bosses nor the Democrats nor any other spokesmen associated with the “Occupy” movement have disavowed or apologized for these outbursts.

Now the actual neo-Nazis are out in the open.

Weasel Zippers: American Nazi Party Declares Its Full Support For Occupy Wall Street’s “Courage” And “Dedication” To “Fighting Judeo-Capitalist Bankers”……

(h/t: bumr50)

Much more here.

Anti-Semitic Protester at Occupy Wall Street – LA

Click here to view the embedded video.

(h/t: WeaselZippers)

Uploaded by ReasonTV on Oct 14, 2011

Here’s one of the protesters Reason.tv spoke to at Occupy Wall Street in Los Angeles on October 12, 2011. She identifies herself as Patricia McAllister and as an employee of Los Angeles Unified School District.

“I think that the Zionist Jews, who are running these big banks and our Federal Reserve, which is not run by the federal government… they need to be run out of this country,” she said.

For the full coverage of this protest, please go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sV-Io_gfL4.

Says refugee000:

Krauthammer was on the money…this is becoming scapegoatism…ala 1932 Germany.

Occupy Chicago Joins Destroy Israel Anti-war Peace March

(h/t: Vlad Tepes)

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Occupy Movement: The Rise of the New Nazi Party?

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by xdm45acp on Oct 13, 2011

The New Nazi Party

Parting shots from the good guys:

Blues Brothers: “I hate Illinois Nazis!”

Click here to view the embedded video.

Watch the famous scene in which Jake and Elwood force the Nazis to jump off a bridge.

#YouMightBeAFleabagger Twitter Hashtag

John Difool says:

Be sure to get your digs in @ #here:
http://twitter.com/#!/search?q=%23YouMightBeAFleabagger

This hashtag reportedly originated with David Burge at Iowahawk.

Click to view and retweet the above message!

Also see:

Zombie: More Anti-Semitism at Occupy Los Angeles

Gates of Vienna has the story:

Editor’s note: The following article was a response to a piece in Aftenposten that likened Fjordman to a Nazi. The paper denied him his statutory “right of reply”, so he is publishing his prepared response here and at other online locations instead.

We encourage as many blogs as possible to mirror these posts. Our goal is for more people to read this article than if it had been published in Aftenposten, as Fjordman originally intended. The Norwegian MSM will discover that they no longer control the flow of information to the public. We will demonstrate that the “new media” can do a better job of disseminating news than the newspapers can.

I sent them this essay a few days ago (as Peder Jensen, of course) for review. They rejected it. I’m not going to claim that it is the best text I have ever written, but I think it is at least as well-written, well-researched and logically coherent as the countless mediocre and easily-forgotten essays that very same newspaper has published about racist white Islamophobes and right-wing extremists.

I was first told that the text didn’t match the title. I think it does. I linked it to the Nazi sympathies of Islamic organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood and showed how the authorities and the mainstream media have appeased the real Nazis of our time. However, they wanted me to remove the second part. I refused, and argued that the examples I had used were relevant. The same journalist then changed tactics and stated that my arguments were not new and had been used before. I suppose that means that Aftenposten will reject all future essays about Islamophobia or xenophobia, since most people have heard those arguments hundreds of times before, if not more. Somehow, I doubt that will happen.

Aftenposten asked me to remove the reference to my upcoming book The Curious Civilization from the text because this could be seen as a commercial of some kind. I admit that was indeed part of the reason why I put it there. That is the one change that I would have been willing to make to the text, to cut out that particular reference. Also note that they didn’t dispute a single factual claim that I wrote in the essay. I can easily document all of them.

The bottom line is that one has the “right to reply”, but apparently only as long as the journalists agree with your reply, which isn’t very helpful. I can accept being rejected if I simply don’t write well enough. I am not claiming that every single text I write is a masterpiece. Perhaps this one isn’t. But I cannot live with being turned down because of ideological censorship, and will not rewrite an essay to please those doing so. Perhaps I am wrong, but I personally sense an element of that motive here. If that is indeed the case then I will not accept it. That is why I started blogging in the first place. I therefore publish the text here to highlight censorship in the press.

by Peder Jensen, also known as the writer Fjordman on the Internet

On the 30th of July of this year, Aftenposten printed the article “They are the third wave,” in which they harassed people such as Bat Ye’or, Robert Spencer and myself. The illustrations in the printed edition were particularly appalling. One was shown a picture of Bat Ye’or, and on the next page a picture of the convicted Nazi traitor Vidkun Quisling. This is extremely tactless, especially considering that the Nazis were responsible for the genocide of about six million Jews and the fact that Bat Ye’or is Jewish. Besides, Aftenposten‘s own historical relationship with the Nazis is far from pretty.

The message that is now being presented in the mass media after the atrocities committed by Anders Behring Breivik is that critics of Islam like myself are the Nazis of our time. But is this true? The Nazis were national Socialists, even though many people would now like us to forget the second part of their ideology. I have personally never heard of a totalitarian movement that could not also be partially described as Socialist. Is it a coincidence that a disproportionate number of Western converts to Islam are neo-Nazis or Marxists? Do they share a common totalitarian DNA?

In 2008, Marte Michelet from Dagbladet startlingly enough made common cause with Islamic organizations, Communists and neo-Nazis in favour of a new, large mosque in Cologne. German neo-Nazis regard Islamic organizations as allies in the struggle against “Jewish-Zionist dominance.” This did not lead to critical remarks from other media in Norway. There is more inbreeding in the Norwegian press than amongst Pakistani cousins.

As I mention in my upcoming book on European culture, The Curious Civilization, Muslims have a choice between Mozart and Hitler, and often choose Hitler of their own free will. In sharp contrast to the East Asian passion for European Classical music, Adolf Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf was number two on the bestseller list in the allegedly moderate NATO member state Turkey as late as in 2005. The book is still popular in parts of the Arab world.

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded by Hassan al-Banna in 1928, grew in parallel with the Nazi movement in Europe and was inspired by this in addition to Islam. Their leader Mahdi Akef has reassured his followers that Jihad “will smash Western civilization and replace it with Islam, which will dominate the world.” Akef stated in 2007 that if Muslims are not able to achieve this in the near future they are “obliged to continue Jihad [holy war to expand Islamic global rule], which will lead to the collapse of Western civilization.”

The Islamic Council of Norway, which is being funded by native Norwegian taxpayers, receives guidance from the European Council for Fatwa and Research about issues such as whether or not to support the death penalty for homosexuals. The Council is led by the powerful Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual guide of the Muslim Brotherhood. Qaradawi, who supports marriage with underage children, has openly boasted that Muslims will conquer Europe, spoken in positive terms of the Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis, and suggested that the next mass murder of Jews will come at the hands of Muslims. As Walid al-Kubaisi points out, the Brotherhood has a big influence in many countries, the West included. Representatives of Jonas Gahr Støre’s Foreign Ministry have met members of the Muslim Brotherhood for talks in Oslo.

In 2007 under the government of Jens Stoltenberg, Norway was the only Western country to recognize the Palestinian government that was then led by Hamas. The ideology of Hamas has many similarities with Nazism. This move was widely applauded by the Norwegian press at the time. People within the governing parties and the political Left wanted to support such a government financially, which would imply that Norwegian taxpayers had to fund terrorists.

In September 2011 the Norwegian Police Security Service (PST) asked the cartoonist Kurt Westergaard to leave Norway because they feared that an assassination attempt would be made against him. According to Islamic sources, critics of Mohammed were killed by his followers. Given that his personal example, or Sunna, which along with the Koran constitutes the teachings of Islam, this remains a valid principle to this day. Those who want to kill Theo van Gogh or Geert Wilders are therefore acting in full compliance with traditional Islamic theology.

This is described in Halvor Tjønn’s surprisingly realistic Norwegian biography of Mohammed. Ibn Warraq, author of the book Why I Am Not a Muslim, is a man who was born in Pakistan but has to write under a pseudonym in order to avoid the death penalty for apostasy. Islam is the only religion on Earth that prescribes death to those who criticize or leave it.

Thomas Seltzer, a host on NRK3, has presented a caricature of me as a multi-handicapped writer in a wheelchair. I presume that this makes me the Norwegian equivalent of Stephen Hawking, which I take as a compliment. Alternatively, one could imagine it to be an insinuation that people in wheelchairs are drivelling fools, which is not particularly tasteful.

The difference between a humorist and a bully is that a true humorist makes fun of the powerful, not the weak. Seltzer can ridicule people like me because he knows that we will not assault him, but he does not dare to show a drooling Yusuf al-Qaradawi in a wheelchair explaining to Muslims that paedophilia is OK. By so doing he has himself indirectly admitted who the real successors to the Nazis in our time actually are. I can inform him that genuine neo-Nazis do not like me at all and have circulated rumours on the Internet for years about me being an Israeli agent because of my clear pro-Israeli line.

Some people might assert that I, who stretch the boundaries of freedom of speech, should put up with as much. Perhaps. The difference is that citizens do not have to pay for my writings. Through the TV license they have to pay for what is broadcast on NRK, whether they want to or not. In an age when a heavily left-leaning press looks like as a wall-to-wall carpet of Multicultural propaganda, one has to ask why. Hundreds of thousands of Norwegians are fed up with the fact that those who are deeply concerned for the future of their children because of a mass immigration that is unprecedented in human history are harassed by their own press corps and labelled as extremists, racists and Nazis.

Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg has spoken in favour of more openness and democracy after Breivik. One of the most important things one could do to get a democratic debate going in Norway is to remove press subsidies and to abolish NRK in its present form. The question is whether the Labour Party is willing to do this as long as NRK constitutes an integral part of the Left’s grip on power.

Er islamkritikere vår tids nazister?

Norwegian-language version of this article.

Stinking up Wall Street: Protesters accused of living in filth as shocking pictures show one demonstrator defecating on a POLICE CAR

Bloomberg: ‘Protesters are taking jobs away from the city’

Gee, ya think?

The shocking images demonstrate the extent to which conditions have deteriorated as demonstrations in downtown Manhattan enter their fourth week. Further pictures seen by Mail Online have been censored, as we deemed them too graphic to show.

According to eye witnesses, when people ran to tell nearby police about the man defecating on the squad car they were ignored.

Incredible.

Standing downwind of the piles of rubbish, bankers walking past the man did a double take before hurrying away.

Brookfield Office Properties, which owns Zuccotti Park, the site of the New York demonstration, have already railed against protesters, who they claim are creating sanitation problems.

‘Sanitation is a growing concern,’ Brookfield said in a statement.

‘Normally the park is cleaned and inspected every week night. . . because the protesters refuse to cooperate. . .the park has not been cleaned since Friday, September 16th and as a result, sanitary conditions have reached unacceptable levels,’ CBS News reported.

Although many of the protesters are understood to be making strenuous efforts to clean up after themselves, after three weeks of occupation, the strain of hundreds of people living on the street has begun to take its toll.

Much more here.

According to Jammie Wearing Fool, the New York Dookie Dude has already inspired a satirical T-shirt.

Problem is, Brookfield Office Properties, the owner of the park, received a huge tax-subsidized loan from the Obama Administration just before they allowed the #OccupyWallStreet protesters to camp there. The loan was for another wind-farm boondoggle. What repercussions would Brookfield face if they suddenly decided it was time to back out of this devil’s bargain and ask the NYPD to evict this gaggle of malcontents from their park?

It is wrong to encourage huge mobs of angry, irresponsible, lawless, and, in some cases, deranged people to gather all over the US. No one made provision for sanitary facilities or other accommodations. These “demonstrations” provide a breeding ground for disease and vermin and impose costs on taxpayers. The ringleaders knew full well that the mobs were going to obstruct traffic, make noise, discard trash and filth everywhere, invade nearby businesses and vandalize the bathrooms, and create a public nuisance in general. That was the plan from the get-go!

Were it not for their political connections, the owners of Zuccotti Park in NYC would have been fined heavily for harboring a public nuisance on their property. The denizens of the park would have been expelled and made to pay for cleanup of garbage and litter. The person who dropped a deuce on the police car would have gone to jail.

Mobs can become dangerous

Mobs can become dangerous at any time. People caught up in mob psychology often perpetrate crimes that they would ordinarily not be tempted to commit. There is no predicting what a mob might do if someone stirs them up – and it is all too easy for a few people planted within a mob to do just that.

At the very least, the Democrats who fomented this mess should have disavowed the rabidly anti-Semitic statements on the part of certain demonstrators. I can only imagine the hue and cry in the media and the political sphere that would have ensued if someone behaving in that way had infiltrated a Tea Party event.

Occupy Atlanta Silences Civil Rights Hero John Lewis!

(h/t: PJ Tatler)

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by conservARTive on Oct 8, 2011

What we saw at the “revolution”:

Many curious citizens and media outlets came to the first Occupy Atlanta event, and were visible shocked and confused by the consistent Marxism employed by the group. People abandoned their individuality and liberty to be absorbed into a hypnotizing collective. The facilitator made it clear that he was not a “leader” and that everyone was completely equal; words often spoken by leftists, but in this case they actually applied their philosophy. Into this surreal and oppressive environment, Rep. John Lewis, a civil rights hero and icon of American leftism, came to speak as has so often done at left-wing rallies and events in Atlanta. He is practically worshiped in Democrat circles, and was visibly stunned to see these Marxists turn him away. It was reminiscent of previous Marxist revolutions in history when those who ignorantly supported the revolutionaries are, over time, purged and rejected for the “good of the collective”, when their usefulness has expired.

http://secularstupidest.com
http://rightosophy.com
http://conservartive.com

Mobs encourage unhealthy and regressive behavior

Mobs don’t do anything automatically. Someone always starts them up, and very often, the real ringleaders are not visible on the podium.

Whenever a large group of “protesters” or “activists” are crowded close together, several people “planted” in the crowd can easily manipulate the rest of them to follow along. All it takes is two or three people to start up with these “call and response” vocalizations, and the crowd will join in and continue that pattern. I suspect that the “call and response” is another example of “astroturf” activity incited by the ringleaders, to inculcate behavior patterns in the crowd that makes them easier to manipulate when the time comes.

The imitative hand-flapping and finger-waggling on the part of the crowd reminds me of the “stimming” behavior that some children and adults with autism use as a means of comforting themselves. The call-and-response repetition reminds me of the echolalia that, in anyone other than small children, is symptomatic of various mental disorders.

This is a sick form of manipulation. If I found myself in a group of people and someone was trying to get me to behave like that, I would leave.

Gates of Vienna: ‘We Have Our Revolution’

This video from the “Occupy Wall Street” demo is too creepy for words. Watch it; you’ll see what I mean.

And make sure to let it run all the way through — Vlad has added his own special take at the end:

Egyptian Tahrir Sq vet gives keynote at march on Wall St Oct 2011

Gates of Vienna: What’s Really Going On With Those Wall Street Protests?

Ezra Levant answers Keith Olbermann:

Occupy Wall St. shows its inevitable motive

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video.

Organizer admits to paying ‘Occupy DC’ protesters [VIDEO]

(h/t: Blazing Cat Fur)

Occupy Wall St. Protesters Being Paid

A liberal organizer told the Daily Caller on Thursday afternoon that he paid some Hispanics to attend “Occupy DC” protests happening in the nation’s capital.

TheDC attended the protest event, an expansion of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement that began in New York City. Some aspects of the protest, it turned out, are more Astroturf than grassroots…

More here.

This Soros-funded course for journalists slanders the entire Counterjihad as an “astroturf” right-wing conspiracy.

Project much, George?

Media Research Center Network/CMI has the story:

(h/t: Big Journalism)

Program launched to teach press about Muslim sensitivities blames ‘right-wing activists.’

By Iris Somberg Thursday, September 29, 2011 10:34 AM EDT

A new course on Islam designed for journalists tries to minimize the impact and importance of “jihad” by comparing it to the number of murders in America each year. That same course claims “right-wing activists” tried to tie American Muslims to terrorism and doesn’t mention examples of Islamic attacks on press freedom.

That’s the way a prominent news organization is teaching journalists in a three-hour online course. The Poynter News University, part of the Poynter Institute, launched the free course “Covering Islam in America” to guide the media on their coverage of Muslim communities.

The George Soros-funded Social Science Research Council, which received $50,000 from the Open Society Institute “For Initiative on HIV/AIDS and Social Transformation,” is one of the groups behind the initiative, along with the Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University. That fits with a theme for liberal financier Soros, who has spent more than $52 million on influencing the media. The Islamic course also links to another Soros-funded entity, the well-financed Center for American Progress.

In about 30 pages of text with links to other reports and articles, journalists can go through and read about the history of Islam, Muslims in America, and how to cover stories on Islam. Besides learning basic facts about Muslims and their history, the course adds ways to put “jihad” into perspective, attack conservatives, and provide a list of liberal groups that can be contacted for expert advice and quotes.

The pre and post-assessments give a hint as to the nature of the course. One question asked, “What grievances might sources associated with ‘Political Islam’ hold against Western journalists?” The answer is that “Western journalists are seen as all of the following: “hostile to Islam,” “focus too much on Islamic violence,” “viewed as water carriers for Western government agendas,” and “thought to be unable to understand Islam unless they embrace Islam.”

Course instructors Lawrence Pintak and Stephen Franklin are both former foreign correspondents. Pintak serves as dean at The Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University, which is a partner of the project…

Edward R. Murrow must be turning in his grave.

…He also has two books on journalism and Islam and defends the biased, activist network Al Jazeera English.

This course is “A project of The Poynter Institute funded by The Knight Foundation.” Soros’s Open Society Foundations have worked closely with The Knight Foundation. They partnered up to start the Investigative News Network, which received $200,000 from the Knight Foundation and $100,000 from the Open Society Foundations. The Knight Foundations President and CEO, Alberto Ibarguen, is also on the board for AOL and yet another key Soros backed group, the progressive investigative reporting start-up ProPublica.

There is some useful information in the Islamic course for those journalists that did not pay attention in their history classes and are ignorant of Islamic beliefs. However, this does not excuse statements that accuse conservatives of bigotry.

“Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, a group of right-wing activists who view themselves as ‘anti-Jihadists’ have aggressively tried to tie American Muslims to terrorism overseas and in the United States. You can learn more about some of these groups in the following…”

The reports that journalists are told to look at to uncover the “right-wing activists” agenda are even more telling. The first is a report from none other than the Soros-funded progressive group Center for American Progress, which received $7.3 million from the Open Society Foundations since the year 2000.

Read it all.

This is just one method George Soros uses to plant his agenda into the minds of media professionals.

Also see:

• Big Journalism: FCC Orders NBC Newsrooms To Partner With Soros-Funded Non-Profits

EthicalOil.org has the story:

Saudi Arabia moves to censor Canadian TV ad

TORONTO, CANADA – The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, an oil rich dictatorship, has moved to censor a Canadian television ad that educates Canadian consumers about the oppression of women in Saudi Arabia and the role played by Saudi oil exports in enabling this oppression. The ad can be viewed here.

Click here to view the embedded video.

“This is a brazen act of domestic political interference by a foreign dictatorship that neither understands nor respects the rights of women or freedom of speech,” said Alykhan Velshi, executive director of EthicalOil.org, a grassroots advocacy organization that educates consumers about their choice between ethical oil from Canada’s oil sands and conflict oil from dictatorships like Saudi Arabia. “Each time we buy Saudi conflict oil we are funding their oppression – and now their attempts at Saudi-style censorship of Canadian TV. This is the ad Saudi Arabia doesn’t want Canadians to see.”

On September 6, 2011, Telecaster Services from the Television Bureau of Canada, the advertising review and clearance service funded by Canada’s private broadcasters, notified EthicalOil.org that it had received a cease and desist letter from lawyers for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia demanding that approval for EthicalOil.org’s ad be withdrawn. Telecaster Services had approved the ethical oil spot on August 18, 2011 and the ad subsequently ran and completed its run of schedule on the Oprah Winfrey Network (Canada).

The cease and desist letter was sent by Norton Rose, a global law firm with Canadian offices. Norton Rose attorney Rahool Agarwal has confirmed his representation of Saudi Arabia to EthicalOil.org’s legal counsel. Despite repeated requests Norton Rose has refused to provide ethicaloil.org’s legal counsel with the material sent to the Telecaster on behalf of the Saudi dictatorship.

In response to the Saudi dictatorship’s move, EthicalOil.org is taking the following actions:

1. The ad has been put back on the air. Starting today the Sun News Network is airing the spot.
2. Velshi has written to His Excellency Osamah A. Al Sanosi Ahmad, the Saudi Arabian Ambassador in Canada, informing him the ad has been put back on the air and challenging him to a televised debate about the ad and its contents.
3. Velshi has alerted Foreign Minister John Baird and Dean Allison, Chairman of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade about the incident in writing, calling on the government and the parliamentary committee to investigate a foreign dictatorship trying to censor what Canadians can and cannot see on their televisions.

For more information, contact:
Alykhan Velshi
EthicalOil.org
Alykhan@ethicaloil.org

Commenter Shobhna Kapoor requests:

Please express your outrage at this Saudi bullying to Stephen Harper at pm@pm.gc.ca.

More here:

• Ezra Levant: Extremists’ oil protest puzzling
• Book by Ezra Levant: Ethical Oil: The case for Canada’s oilsands
• Sun News: Pipeline protest a big bust
• Blazing Cat Fur: Ezra Levant Mocks CBC’s Beloved Pipeline Protest
• Blazing Cat Fur: Saudi Threats a SLAPP in the Face

TheBlaze: Report: ‘Arabic Words’ Appearing on the Bellies of Southwest Planes

KNX-RADIO in Los Angeles reports the markings “appeared to have been done with a chemical process that reveals the text once an auxiliary power unit is turned on and heats up the outside skin of the aircraft.”

ABC15 confirmed that federal investigators are now involved.

Now this is ominous. Is somebody doing a “dry run” for access to the aircraft?

Obviously, only somebody who knows Arabic would be writing Arabic words on planes. Let’s just say that I don’t think it’s Christian Arab employees (assuming Southwest Airlines has any) who have been vandalizing the aircraft.

Notably, the news coverage fails to tell us which Arabic-language words were written on the planes.

PJM: Driven Mad: Trucking Industry Collapsing Under Regulation

Foolish laws are hampering America’s lifeblood industry, and making drivers more tired to boot.

Ill-conceived trucking regulations are one more way that the Obama Administration is killing jobs, creating shortages, and causing prices to rise for everything delivered by truck.

Honest Reporting Canada needs your help.

They work hard to combat anti-Semitism and anti-Israel bias in the media. You can donate here.

Cyprus and Turkey: erratic PM Erdogan threatens to bring in the navy again

The Greek Cypriot government is being put under enormous pressure by the leader of Turkey over oil and gas exploration. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey is turning into a regional bully who threatens to bring the navy into international waters when nations don’t placate him.

Not only this, Turkey is issuing threats and tantrums over the EU presidency in July 2012 when Cyprus (Greek controlled) will take over the presidency for six months in accordance with the rotation system. In the world of Erdogan he can’t grasp basic reality because Greek controlled Cyprus is internationally recognized and not one nation supports Turkey’s control over northern Cyprus.

More alarming, we have a political leader who bombs northern Iraq when he deems it to be in the interest of national security and then seeks to dictate over the illegal occupation of northern Cyprus and threatens Israel. NATO should be raising questions about the membership of Turkey because democratic nations are being warned about Turkey’s navy being on standby in order to implement Turkey’s policies of regional bullying.
[…]
The latest threat by Erdogan is over the Greek Cypriot government issuing the right to drill for oil and gas of the coast of Cyprus. Therefore, exploratory drilling led to a sharp rebuke by Turkey because Erdogan stated “frigates, gunboats and its air force will constantly monitor developments in the area.”

Erdogan also implied that Turkey would start exploration in an area which is claimed mainly by Israel. This will further lead to tensions with Greece, Cyprus (Greek controlled) and Israel. Also, the EU should rebuke Turkey over its stance over the presidency next year when Cyprus will hold this position.

Blazing Cat Fur: Academia Today: University of Lethbridge Congratulates 911 Troofer Student On Staff Appointment At Holocaust Denial Rag

The University of Lethbridge has deemed fit to congratulate well known 911 Troofer Josh Blakeney on his appointment as a staff writer for a rabid little holocaust denial and all purpose conspiracy rag called Veterans Today. VT purports to be a “Military & Foreign Affairs” journal. I had no idea the SS remained a viable magazine demographic.

GoV: How Does a Totalitarian Democracy Avoid Responsibility?

They scapegoat.

In a totalitarian democracy, this is how you set someone up so you can take him down. It is sick and disturbing on its own, but the implications are terrifying for the victim of their demonization.

The image above is supposed to be a “satire” on Fjordman, but it’s far more than that. It’s the planned takedown of an innocent man.

What you’re seeing [click to see image at Gates of Vienna] is a still image from a ‘comedy’ that will air on Norwegian TV. Fjordman, called here “Fjordland”, is a paraplegic who can’t speak. Somehow this character is supposed to be a figure of fun. This is especially funny you see, because Fjordman is famous for his words. Thus having a “dumb” ‘Fjordland’ character is a scream.

This is not only sick, it’s a set-up. I have no proof of my theory, but from all appearances it would seem they plan to have Fjordman take the fall for Breivik’s behavior. Here are the steps by which I believe Fjordman will be criminalized and imprisoned…

Author’s note: This is the third of a three part essay dealing with Islamic terrorism and what can be expected regarding Islam’s ultimate fate. These articles are written in memoriam of the 9-11 atrocity’s tenth anniversary and are dedicated to the 3,000 innocent Americans who were murdered on that fateful day.

How will it end?

Short answer ― The Muslim holocaust.

There is a proverb whose thread is found both in Aesop and the Bible. It reads:

“The clay pot should keep its distance from the iron kettle.”

Instead of keeping its distance, Islam has cozened its way into Western civilization and, parading under false colors as an alleged religion, it flies a counterfeit Liberal standard of interfaith Multiculturalism. Besotted with its own temporary successes and newfound “purity” ― through a recent reformation leaving it even more violent, intolerant, misogynistic and puritanical ― Islam is in the process of infiltrating Western civilization to an unprecedented degree. However, in this respect, it is the non-industrial Islamic clay pot that is getting too close to the militarily advanced Western iron kettle.

A Talmudic variation of this fable provides a different perspective: “If a pot falls upon a stone, woe to the pot; if a stone falls upon a pot, woe to the pot; either way, woe to the pot” (Esther Rabbah, 7:10). For Islam’s clay pot, violence is the stone. As Islam continues to embrace terrorism it is eagerly drawn to that stone with a dangerous degree of impetus. In its love of death and martyrdom, Islam puts the stone in precipitous motion, which just as often falls upon the heads of Muslims themselves.

In either case ― much as with so-called Islamic martyrdom ― Islam imprudently brings itself into proximity with danger and eventually this will prove its own undoing. Suffused with delusions of adequacy, Muslims think nothing of constantly antagonizing Western powers who long ago perfected industrialized warfare to an extent that Islam can only dream of, despite its supremacist fantasies.

Like a candle that sputters and flares, Islam casts outsized shadows which too many in the West mistake for genuine military potency. The exact opposite is true and it is only by using the asymmetrical warfare of terrorism that Islam holds any sway. It is a schoolyard bully writ large and every bit as cowardly. The brittleness of Islamic doctrine is too often confused with strength and its fanaticism taken for authority.

In a recent Berlin speech, Swiss Member of Parliament, Oskar Freysinger, noted that, “Islam is only as strong as we are weak.” One glimpse of how Islam remains almost entirely reliant upon Political Correctness to drive its Western agenda reveals that this parasitic entity’s success wholly depends upon the frailty of a civilization debilitated by Multiculturalism and self-doubt. This is underscored both by the physical compulsion and violence that lies beneath so much of Islamic doctrine and the fact that no nation in history has ever voluntarily adopted Islam without an application of force being involved.

Politician Barrack Obama epitomizes the danger that Liberals pose to Islam. Not only do they appease and cower before Islamic bullying but Liberalism also infantilizes Muslim men through the soft racism of lowered expectations. Thus enabled by such hollow victories, Islam is capable of duping itself into believing its own propaganda; a perilous mistake at the best of times and often fatal in a time of conflict.

Little do Liberals understand how they will be among the first who go to the wall should Islam prevail. Nor, in their haste to disarm the world, do they understand that such military ineptitude on their part will see them left with few responses other than nuclear Armageddon when confronted by WMD terrorist strikes. Through appeasement and facilitation, Liberals are Islam’s most dangerous “friends”.

This same Politically Correct doctrine has seen ineffectual campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq that have cost the multinational coalition on the order of two trillion dollars, with America shouldering a lopsided $1.36 trillion share of the burden. That is the cost of keeping in check just two of some fifty Muslim majority countries. Subduing the other four dozen Islamic nations represents at least another staggering $96 trillion dollars of expenditure and countless more military casualties. No single nation or combination of international economies can possibly afford this sort of expenditure.

This inordinate cost of conventional war needed to obtain even a modicum of peace is, perhaps, the grimmest thing about Islam’s future. As the mask slips and “radical” or “fundamentalist” Islam are revealed to be mainstream and fully compatible with regularly accepted Islamic doctrine, Total War ― something Muslims continue to boast of declaring against the West ― looms evermore probable. However, the economic factors alone point directly away from conventional war.

Truth be told, in the absence of that $96 trillion dollars, there is only unconventional warfare left as a survival option. Nuclear weapons represent the sole existing and cost-effective way of managing hostilities with some 1.6 billion people. Like a proverbial trout in the milk pail, this one simple fact is difficult to ignore. Basic economics dooms perpetually hostile Islam to utter annihilation.

Any expectation of Islam pacifying, moderating or reforming itself must be dismissed out of hand. Islam has already undergone a recent reformation from which it emerged as an even more intolerant, more violent, more puritanical and more misogynistic creed. Those Muslims who do seek any pacification or sincere moderation of Islam’s violent doctrine are usually put to death by more devout believers.

Lending some much needed perspective to this nettlesome debacle is a quick estimate of the death toll that reasonably could be expected if Islam somehow managed to take over the world. Here are several, admittedly, rough estimates of what to anticipate from the establishment of a global caliphate.

1.) Extermination of all Jews:
Some 13.5 million people, world-wide would most likely die at the hands of their Muslim oppressors.

2.) Execution of all homosexuals:
We will use what some call a “wildly exaggerated figure” for the sake of including the bisexual and transgender community plus other sexual deviants who would all be put to death under shari’a. Therefore, some 10% of the world’s population or 600 million people would fall into this category.

The remaining factors that follow are much more difficult to quantify.

3.) Armed resistance to Muslim encroachment:
It’s safe to say that nearly everyone in the counterjihad movement would perish fighting a Muslim attempt to overrun America or Europe. Worldwide, the numbers would most likely exceed that of the Jews. We’ll place it at a meager 100 million.

4.) Women denied access to medical care:
This is a huge number because, under Islamic law, women would only be able to be seen by female doctors—an exceedingly small fraction of this world’s medical practitioners. We’ll use the figure for global female cancer mortality rates as an example of how reduced early intervention would escalate avoidable deaths, especially among women. That figure amounts to more than 3 million per year.

5.) Liquidation of political prisoners:
Toss in another 10 million dead. Remember, Islam has many enemies, be they perceived or real.

6.) Execution of those who refuse to convert:
We shall use the world’s population of Catholics as a figure representing those who would adamantly refuse to convert or cooperate and be put to death instead. While the number would likely be much higher, this figure approaches over 1 billion.

We now have a total of 1.726 billion people who would die within the first year or so of Islam establishing its global caliphate. This figure is larger than the world’s Muslim population. Millions more would die each year due to Islam’s heavy-handed shari’a law and its excessive demand for capital punishment. Women would keep dying in droves due to the unavailability of female doctors. Emerging homosexuals would be killed as with many other deviants; be they political, religious or otherwise.

Concealed in all this is a small yet meaningful number of so-called “honor killings” that typically involve young Muslim girls or wives who ― through premarital sexual activity or inappropriate dalliances ― have disgraced their families and are put to death for it, typically by their own family members. In a global caliphate, over one million of these murders per year would not be an unexpected figure. Do not think for one moment that Western women would magically be immune from this stricture. Imams and Islamic mutaween (“morals police”) would cheerfully put to death any youthful or adult offenders regardless of their race or belief.

Hidden even deeper in these figures is a calculation which will probably fail to evoke much sympathy amongst knowledgeable Westerners; yet, humanity demands that it be recognized. Should the global Islamic caliphate arrive, there also would be countless more Muslim deaths, just as there are today throughout the MME (Muslim Middle East); except for now these executions would proceed briskly, unfettered by any condemnation from the world community that they, at least marginally, receive today. Rape victims being given lashes or stoned to death and other appalling injustices would flourish.

However crude the above projections are, they do not even account for a world suddenly stripped of many modern technologies considered haram (“forbidden”) by Islam. A sharp drop in agricultural productivity, reduction in medical services ― as noted above ― along with the elimination of food supplies derived from haram animals, such as pigs (including rennet, gelatin, whey and alcohol), would see mass starvations and medically preventable deaths soar upwards. These are just a bare few examples of the unknown death toll that would accompany an Islamic caliphate. Unimaginable as it may seem, imposition of global shari’a could result in the death of up to half this world’s population.

None of this deals with the tremendous loss of Western and world heritage in the form of buildings, monuments, paintings, sculptures, books and priceless documents that would be heaped upon bonfires or pulverized into rubble. The Magna Carta, America’s Constitution plus innumerable other ephemera would go up in smoke. Notre Dame’s fabulous Rose Window would follow the Bamiyan Buddhas into oblivion. They would be just the start of unparalleled and inconceivable vandalism on a global scale.

Rarely, if ever ― even among counterjihad fora ― is there any mention of either the massive death toll or the loss of heritage that would accompany global shari’a law. There remains, especially in the larger public, an almost intentional ignorance of these two devastating potentials. Eventually, in the face of so much stark evidence, it becomes difficult to deny that there exists the will not to believe.

This will not to believe carries its own loathsome price tag. Recent events in Norway show that long before Muslims manage to demographically displace native Europeans there will begin a serious backlash against the Multiculturalists who have imposed this lethal burden upon the West. It is rather doubtful that American and European culture will go quietly into the Politically Correct Islamic night.

Ironically, as Muslims continue to financially drain the West ― through exorbitant military campaigns, increased security measures, petroleum sales and abuse of social benefits in host countries ― they only increase the eventual appeal of cost effective measures that will be required to subdue Islam. There will also come a time when Western nations begin to recoil at the prospect of sending any more soldiers to die for the sake of letting Muslims erect yet another shari’a government and terrorist production facility.

Complicating all of this is how the concept of military deterrence is essentially nonfunctional as regards Islam. A culture that glorifies and worships death is more than difficult to deter. For every bit that the West shrinks from waging Total War, the necessity of posing an existential threat to Islam only increases. When it comes to the ineffectuality of deterrence, no better example exists that of modern day Iran. The ramifications of Ahmadinejad’s tutelage under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini pose some serious issues. Recall Khomeini’s words during his 1980 speech in Qom, the Shi’ite spiritual hub:

We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land burn. I say let this land [Iran] go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.

When Ahmadinejad threatens to “wipe Israel off the map” it is with the implicit knowledge that Iran, as a country, may perish as a result. In effect, he is turning his entire nation into a gigantic suicide bomber. Neither is this the end of it. Iran’s reckless pursuit of genocide against the Jews could precipitate the Muslim holocaust all by itself. Little known to most people is Israel’s Samson Option. If true, the Jewish state has quietly informed its Arab neighbors that a single WMD strike against Israel will result in the entire MME (Muslim Middle East) being incinerated in nuclear plasma. Hundreds of fusion warheads along with newly acquired Dolphin class submarines and cruise missiles back this up.

There is cold comfort in this for Israel but it also has quite worrisome implications for the West. At a recent pan-Arab conference Saudi Arabia’s king essentially told Ahmadinejad to “sit down and shut up” with his genocidal ravings before the entire MME is annihilated. Should he take this admonishment to heart, then the question is beggared as to who else might be targeted for an Iranian nuclear strike.

It bears mentioning how simple statistics indicate that, beyond a certain as yet undetermined number of Islamic nuclear warheads, there emerges a non-zero probability that one or more of them will fall into terrorist hands. Keeping that in mind, America ― better known to Iranians as “The Great Satan” ― suddenly materializes as a grim alternative target to Israel. What’s more, the Obama administration’s abject appeasement of Islam can only have strengthened Muslim perceptions that the United States lacks sufficient political will to respond in kind should it experience a nuclear terrorist attack.

As noted earlier, Obama and most of his cabinet have little to no military experience. With their being so unlettered in war fighting doctrine, could it not be possible that these appeasers might abruptly discover ― after repeated military budget cuts ― that massive nuclear retaliation was their sole playing card? Again, pro-disarmament Liberals rate as the most dangerous kind of “friends” that Islam could have.

Repulsive in the extreme is how truly avoidable this looming Muslim holocaust really is. A far less costly program of “wetwork” style targeted assassinations directed at the top echelons of Islam’s clerical, political, scholastic and financial aristocracy could see global jihad quickly screech to a grinding halt. Information hoarding is a way of life in the MME and even more so with terrorist leaders. Break enough strands in their networks and they will no longer function. A useful side effect of such a program would be to create numerous power vacuums that would draw violent contenders like moths to a candle’s flame. Subsequent infighting might even match the original fallout with equally fruitful results.

As noted in Part II of this essay, Islam has “unhappy ending” written all over it. Belmont Club’s Richard Fernandez (Wretchard), was one of the first to note this in his 2003 magnum opus, “The Three Conjectures”:

The most startling result of this analysis is that a catastrophic outcome for Islam is guaranteed whether America retaliates or not. Even if the President decided to let all Americans die to expiate their historical guilt, why would Islamic terrorists stop after that? They would move on to Europe and Asia until finally China, Russia, Japan, India or Israel, none of them squeamish, wrote -1 x 10^9 in the final right hand column. They too would be prisoners of the same dynamic, and they too have weapons of mass destruction.

It is more than safe to say that an industrially and militarily unlettered Islam is not going to take over the world using such a feeble tool as terrorism. As was also noted in Part II, Islam is assembling too many enemies too fast and that pace far outstrips any ability of theirs to perfect the mass production of intricate nuclear weapons nor muster fighting forces of even marginal proficiency. Chronic overreach is a hallmark of Islam and its habit of poking at the Western nuclear dragon with its terrorist pointed wooden stick bodes especially unwell for Muslims everywhere.

Fernandez goes on to observe:

Long before 3,000 New Yorkers died on September 11, Iraq and Iran killed 500,000 Muslims between them. The greatest threat to Muslims is radical Islam; and the greatest threat of all is a radical Islam armed with weapons of mass destruction.

Remember that for eight long years, Iran and Iraq fought to a bloody stalemate using chemical weapons and even ten year-old boys as human minesweepers. Less conservative estimates cite up to a million Muslim fatalities with both nations sending the flower of their youth into an insatiable meat grinder. Now, consider how America rolled up Iraq’s sidewalks in two weeks. This is the “reality gap” confronting Islam and its delusory vision of world domination. No such thing will ever happen.

Given that the global caliphate is forever out of reach, whither Islam? What of its obsessive quest for global supremacy? Handily, Israel provides us with a micro synopsis of the macro global problem. Imagine a tiny nation like Costa Rica routinely beating America’s military posterior like a cheap dime store drum. That is the equivalent of Israel defeating the combined military might of Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. Please remember that, in Arab culture, humiliation is worse than death. Abandoning conventional warfare in favor of terrorism, the Arab nations intentionally selected a strategy of low-intensity conflict whose upper limit would not trigger direct intervention by the global community.

Thus was tiny Israel left alone to defend itself against continuous terrorist attacks the like of which no other nation on earth save, perhaps, India has had to endure. What of the much vaunted peace negotiations; the Oslo “Road Map” and so forth? What about the “land for peace” concessions that Israel has so often made in the pursuit of a negotiated settlement?

Few people understand that any sort of “negotiated peace” with Israel would serve to unravel the entire Islamic Arab consciousness. Reaching even the least sort of peace agreement would be a frank admission that jihad had failed. Furthermore, any recognition of a Jewish state would contravene the genocidal doctrine that is a cornerstone of Islam. Acceptance of Israel’s continued existence contradicts Islamic canon on so many levels that any such thing is unimaginable.

Piled on top of this is Israel’s continuous string of military victories against often overwhelming Arab forces. How then to explain that away without an indisputable annihilation of Israel tucked under their Islamic belt? Deprived of any concrete proof that Islam actually can prevail against the eternally hated Jew, please do not begin to imagine that there will be any near term cessation of hostilities, if ever.

Thus we are presented with the micro model of global terrorism. Withdrawal, surrender, in fact, peace of any sort with Islam is simply out of the question. In reality, Islam offers nothing that remotely resembles an actual “peace treaty”. Instead, there is only hudna, a temporarily cessation of hostilities that is specifically designed to permit Muslims the rearming needed to then break that “truce” at their convenience. Whither Israel … whither the global community where Islam is concerned.

So long as the West does not pose an existential threat to Islam’s continued presence on earth, there will be no accommodation of any sort. This is the bottom line. That degree of political will is sorely lacking in the West and, even if it existed, there is little likelihood that anyone involved would appreciate how any such pact with the unbelievers would be broken at the first instant of advantage for Islam.

Islam has always demanded to be paid in its own bloody coin. Violence is the only tender it recognizes and all other currency is scorned as a coward’s coinage. Hudna, taqiyya and kitman all assure that there is no hope of an honorably negotiated peace. Islam wants no such thing. Global domination is its imperative and any re-scripting of those priorities is simply out of the question.

Hardest of all to remember is that this has been Islam’s central doctrine from the very beginning of its existence. The West’s opposition or threat to Muslims has no bearing on why Islam wages its barbarous terrorism against us. The hammer of violence remains Islam’s only tool and we are all nails in its sight. Islam has already determined how it will end. It is merely a matter of survival for the West and to let Islam’s chips fall where they may. Muslims will forever be cannon fodder for Islam’s eternal jihad. Until they realize this and rebel for once and all time against their warlord masters nothing will ever change.

Remember … as always; Islam wouldn’t have it any other way.

That is how it will end.

Part I: “When Will it End?”

Part II: “Why Will it End?”

Please visit these links:

• Blogmocracy: September 11, 2001
• Gates of Vienna: The Other September 11th
  In 1683; h/t The Osprey.
• Mark Steyn: From “Let’s Roll” to “Let’s Roll Over”
• Noisy Room: Father of Flight 93 Hero Todd Beamer Reflects on Son Storming Cockpit, Shouting ‘Let’s Roll’
• Bruce Bawer: 9-11 and the Pastness of the Past
  Bawer explains how the legacy and memory of 9-11-01 has been spun and misused.
• Winds of Jihad: Ten Years Later: Stand for freedom and against the deception and lies being used to subdue us!
• Winds of Jihad: Never Forget 9-11
• Hillel Stavis: How Harvard Remembered 9-11
  Corruption comes to Harvard via Alwaleed Bin Talal’s Islamic Studies Program.
• Barry Rubin: Ten Years After September 11: Who’s Really Winning the War On Terrorism?
  First of all, ‘terrorism’ is not the name of a foe, but a tactic.
• See-Dubya: Ten years on at the 9-11 7-11
  This particular 7-11 has a dark reputation…

Eonia i mnimi, Memory eternal

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by donjose1949 on May 1, 2009

Memory eternal, Eonia i mnimi, the Phaeacian chorus, Stelio Scordilis, dir. Sts Constantine & Helen Greek Orthodox Cathedral in Honolulu – Hawaii. The 9/11 Memorial concert, September 8, 2002.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by johnvfc on Mar 30, 2010

Extract from Christian Orthodox Memorial Service for the departed Mnimosino – Eulogitaria

Viktor Wichniakov and the orthodox Choir – Eternal memory

Click here to view the embedded video.

Uploaded by MusashiTzu on Sep 20, 2008

Never heard a more uplifting piece of choir music!